is comic grading subjective?

[whisp]

What grade is the Popping Cherry Tart? I'm trying to learn here.

 

Virgn quality, never touched.

[adamstrange]

It should be objective to describe the difference (i.e. defects) between a particular copy in hand vs. how an ideal copy looked coming off the printing press. There would, however, need to be some subjectivity to certain attributes like page quality or color accuracy as it's hard to measure precisely how much the colors have faded or how much the paper has deteriorated.

 

The real difficulty comes when you try to assign a single number to reflect the overall current condition of a copy. Overstreet's standard is imprecise and CGC's is unavailable. Further I would ask who developed the Overstreet standard? What was the review process? Who approved the final version? No one asked for my vote, nor did I get to vote for a representative on the committee. There is and has been no transparent process about the setting of grading standards for comics by any hobby-wide body ever.

 

Nor is there any way to "prove" that a certain algorithm for factoring in differences is correct. One person may hate stains above corner creases. Another person might only minimally mind certain production defects like a natural paper crease while hate others like mis-wraps. When Sotheby's and Christies held comics auctions they had a team of 5 or more well-regarded graders and still had to average the grades because of the differences.

 

If someone were to tell me that a coupon clipped out of the back cover was a lesser defect than 5 spine stresses, all I could say is that his was currently a minority opinion and that if he sold books applying an algorithm like that he was going to have difficulty. That does not, however, mean that he was wrong or that it wouldn't become majority opinion in the future. Consensus about grading has changed over time (check your old Overstreets) so there's no reason to assume we've yet achieved the final standard.

[whisp]

It should be objective to describe the difference (i.e. defects) between a particular copy in hand vs. how an ideal copy looked coming off the printing press. There would, however, need to be some subjectivity to certain attributes like page quality or color accuracy as it's hard to measure precisely how much the colors have faded or how much the paper has deteriorated.

 

The real difficulty comes when you try to assign a single number to reflect the overall current condition of a copy. Overstreet's standard is imprecise and CGC's is unavailable. Further I would ask who developed the Overstreet standard? What was the review process? Who approved the final version? No one asked for my vote, nor did I get to vote for a representative on the committee. There is and has been no transparent process about the setting of grading standards for comics by any hobby-wide body ever.

 

Nor is there any way to "prove" that a certain algorithm for factoring in differences is correct. One person may hate stains above corner creases. Another person might only minimally mind certain production defects like a natural paper crease while hate others like mis-wraps. When Sotheby's and Christies held comics auctions they had a team of 5 or more well-regarded graders and still had to average the grades because of the differences.

 

If someone were to tell me that a coupon clipped out of the back cover was a lesser defect than 5 spine stresses, all I could say is that his was currently a minority opinion and that if he sold books applying an algorithm like that he was going to have difficulty. That does not, however, mean that he was wrong or that it wouldn't become majority opinion in the future. Consensus about grading has changed over time (check your old Overstreets) so there's no reason to assume we've yet achieved the final standard.

 

I am not a big fan of date stamps but I know a person that doesn't mind them.

[conditionfreak]

To make the argument that grading is not subjective is silly.

 

Of course it is subjective. It depends on who is doing the grading. Give one book to one thousand comic book collectors to grade and you will get a range from 7.5 to 9.4. With a couple of 6.0's and 9.6's thrown in because of "eye appeal" or the lack thereof.

 

I truly can't believe it is even being debated. Just check the "for sale" threads on here, and see whereupon a seller puts forth a book as a 6.0. Then someone asks about this or that flaw, and the seller then says something to the effect of "you're right, I'll drop the price fifty bucks".

 

Someone will now make the argument that this was because the seller did not "see" the flaw/s pointed out to him/her. But isn't that what grading is half about? Recognizing (seeing) the flaws?

[THE_BEYONDER]

Of course it is subjective. It depends on who is doing the grading. Give one book to one thousand comic book collectors to grade and you will get a range from 7.5 to 9.4. With a couple of 6.0's and 9.6's thrown in because of "eye appeal" or the lack thereof.

 

You would get this result because a large percentage of collectors have absolutely no idea how to grade a comic book.

[conditionfreak]

My point exactly. Subjective.

[THE_BEYONDER]

My point exactly. Subjective.

 

Grading is subjective.......because collectors don't know how to grade?

 

 

This is what you're saying?

 

 

[conditionfreak]

subjective   

 

–adjective 1. existing in the mind; belonging to the thinking subject rather than to the object of thought (opposed to objective ).

2. pertaining to or characteristic of an individual; personal; individual: a subjective evaluation.

3. placing excessive emphasis on one's own moods, attitudes, opinions, etc.; unduly egocentric.

4. Philosophy. relating to or of the nature of an object as it is known in the mind as distinct from a thing in itself.

5. relating to properties or specific conditions of the mind as distinguished from general or universal experience.

6. pertaining to the subject or substance in which attributes inhere; essential.

 

[conditionfreak]

What I am saying is the definition of subjective. Just about each number above.

[adamstrange]

It should be objective to describe the difference (i.e. defects) between a particular copy in hand vs. how an ideal copy looked coming off the printing press. There would, however, need to be some subjectivity to certain attributes like page quality or color accuracy as it's hard to measure precisely how much the colors have faded or how much the paper has deteriorated.

 

The real difficulty comes when you try to assign a single number to reflect the overall current condition of a copy. Overstreet's standard is imprecise and CGC's is unavailable. Further I would ask who developed the Overstreet standard? What was the review process? Who approved the final version? No one asked for my vote, nor did I get to vote for a representative on the committee. There is and has been no transparent process about the setting of grading standards for comics by any hobby-wide body ever.

 

Nor is there any way to "prove" that a certain algorithm for factoring in differences is correct. One person may hate stains above corner creases. Another person might only minimally mind certain production defects like a natural paper crease while hate others like mis-wraps. When Sotheby's and Christies held comics auctions they had a team of 5 or more well-regarded graders and still had to average the grades because of the differences.

 

If someone were to tell me that a coupon clipped out of the back cover was a lesser defect than 5 spine stresses, all I could say is that his was currently a minority opinion and that if he sold books applying an algorithm like that he was going to have difficulty. That does not, however, mean that he was wrong or that it wouldn't become majority opinion in the future. Consensus about grading has changed over time (check your old Overstreets) so there's no reason to assume we've yet achieved the final standard.

 

I am not a big fan of date stamps but I know a person that doesn't mind them.

It's a good example of where opinions vary. You'll find many GA collectors that view them as a bonus. You'll find many SA/BA collectors that find them a turn-off.

[THE_BEYONDER]

I have no idea what your point is... ?

[conditionfreak]

I can do no more than provide the definition of subjective, to illustrate my point that comic book grading is subjective.

 

hmmm....maybe I could post a book and have all the great graders who visit this site, PM me with their grades. Just of the covers (not a true grading of course), and see how much they differ. Maybe a poll here with some scans and a half dozen choices for grades.

 

But why bother. It won't change a thing. What I call a 7.0, you may call a 6.0. What I call a 6.0, you may call a 7.0.

 

You may deduct for date stamps, I may not. You may deduct for miswraps. I may not. You may deduct for production flaws. I may not. You may deduct for a witnessed signature, I may not. You may deduct for smell. I may not. You may deduct if Edgar Church is written/signed on the cover. I may not.

 

Keep in mind that I don't believe in mint when it comes to comic books. Also keep in mind that I am set in my old ways and don't ascribe to CGC's grading standards (assuming that there are CGC grading standards). I use Overstreet grading standards.

[RockMyAmadeus]

Grading is subjective...but only to a very small degree.

 

Given that CGC can grade exactly the same book differently on any number of occasions, I think that's proof enough of that.

 

However, people who fight you for hours regarding its subjectivity are usually the ones who can't grade for sh!te and like to have a loophole to cover their dishonest arses. (thumbs u

 

 

I've found that the term 'near' ......when used in conjunction with the term 'mint'.....has become increasingly subjective.

 

This comic book is near mint:

 

 

(note the altoid and its proximity to said comic book.)

 

This comic book, however, being further away from the mint, would therefore only be very fine:

 

 

If I were to place the altoid on top of the comic book, it would then become a "mint comic book."

 

Well, at least "mint smelling."

 

[THE_BEYONDER]

[seanfingh]

Most of the books I collect are in 9.2-9.6 range. I've found that the biggest problem with sellers is that they FAIL to check the books at an angle under the light....

 

 

Coupled with the fact that they fail to acknowledge the ripples and rumples as defects . . .

[RockMyAmadeus]

I returned a Flash 110 last year because the Ebay seller claimed F/VF and I gave it a VG+ because it had a sub crease not visible in the scan. Actually you could not tell unless you looked at the back cover. He reluctantly refunded my money and said. "Most people don't even look at the back cover, the next high bidder didn't have a problem with the book". (I had to wait until the other buyer recieved the book before he refunded me.)

 

I argued that..and especially when paying $200 plus for a supposed near VF copy.

 

 

And then, of course, YOU become the bad guy because you insist that people grade accurately...it's like fighting the tide. If 10,000 other customers don't give a rat's petard, who are YOU to be making a stink...or so goes the seller's thinking.

 

Of course, those same sellers wonder why CGC graded books sell for so much more than raw.

 

 

[RockMyAmadeus]

I have no idea what your point is... ?

 

Welcome to my world.

 

[RockMyAmadeus]

Most of the books I collect are in 9.2-9.6 range. I've found that the biggest problem with sellers is that they FAIL to check the books at an angle under the light....

 

 

Coupled with the fact that they fail to acknowledge the ripples and rumples as defects . . .

 

Always be sure to fail to acknowledge the ripples in her rump.

[THE_BEYONDER]

The only objective reality is that reality is completely subjective.

 

 

 

Discuss.

[seanfingh]

 

36-24-36? Only if she's 5'3"